This author is a Pulitzer Prize winner and uncovered scandals in Vietnam and Abu Ghraib. Some people brush him off as a conspiracy theorist and the New Yorker and the Washington Post wouldn’t run this story but I am having trouble understanding why FoxNews wouldn’t run with it. I believe this gets to the heart of Benghazi rather than the nonsense about the talking points. The talking points are a sideshow. This is what the cover up is about! Gun running to Syria and I have been saying it from the start!
Check it out:
In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing the ‘red line’ he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.＊ Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he announced that he would seek congressional approval for the intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad’s offer to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. Why did Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and potentially disastrous.
Continue Reading at ConservativeByte.com